scholarly journals Explanatory factors for variation in the use of breast conserving surgery and radiotherapy in the Netherlands, 1990–2001

The Breast ◽  
2007 ◽  
Vol 16 (6) ◽  
pp. 606-614 ◽  
Author(s):  
S. Siesling ◽  
L.V. van de Poll-Franse ◽  
J.J. Jobsen ◽  
O.J. Repelaer van Driel ◽  
A.C. Voogd
Keyword(s):  
The Netherlands ◽  
Breast Conserving Surgery ◽  
Explanatory Factors

scholarly journals Political Participation and Civic Community of Ethnic Minorities in Four Cities in the Netherlands

Politics ◽  
2005 ◽  
Vol 25 (1) ◽  
pp. 19-30 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anja van Heelsum
Keyword(s):  
The Netherlands ◽  
Political Participation ◽  
Ethnic Minorities ◽  
The Political ◽  
Immigrant Communities ◽  
Migrant Communities ◽  
Explanatory Factors ◽  
Civic Community ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Dutch Cities

In this article, the political participation of Turkish, Surinamese and Moroccan immigrants in four cities in the Netherlands is related to the civic community of these groups. The usefulness of Robert Putnam's civic community perspective is tested for the immigrant communities in Dutch cities in the Netherlands. The relationship between the networks in the migrant communities and political participation found in earlier research can partly explain the differences between the ethnic groups and between the cities, but some additional explanatory factors are suggested.

scholarly journals Explaining the Accountability of Independent Agencies: The Importance of Political Salience

2011 ◽  
Vol 31 (2) ◽  
pp. 209-234 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christel Koop
Keyword(s):  
The Netherlands ◽  
Original Data ◽  
Veto Players ◽  
Legal Basis ◽  
Explanatory Factors ◽  
Reporting Requirements ◽  
The Impact

AbstractIndependent agencies are exempted from the accountability mechanisms inherent in the ministerial hierarchy. To compensate for this, politicians incorporate all kinds of information and reporting requirements into the statutes of the organizations. However, the degree to which this occurs varies considerably, which raises the question: Why are some agencies are made more accountable than others? This study examines the impact of political salience on degrees of accountability, controlling for other potential explanations. Using original data on 103 independent agencies in the Netherlands, the analysis demonstrates that salience has a twofold effect. First, agencies dealing with more salient issues are made more politically accountable. Second, agencies whose statutes are written when the issue of accountability is more salient are also subject to higher degrees of accountability. Other explanatory factors are the number of veto players and the legal basis of the organization.

10 year survival after breast-conserving surgery plus radiotherapy compared with mastectomy in early breast cancer in the Netherlands: a population-based study

2016 ◽  
Vol 17 (8) ◽  
pp. 1158-1170 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marissa C van Maaren ◽  
Linda de Munck ◽  
Geertruida H de Bock ◽  
Jan J Jobsen ◽  
Thijs van Dalen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
The Netherlands ◽  
Early Breast Cancer ◽  
Breast Conserving Surgery ◽  
Population Based ◽  
Population Based Study

Regional and inter-hospital variations in the use of breast-conserving surgery in the Netherlands between 1990–2000

2004 ◽  
Vol 2 (3) ◽  
pp. 164
Author(s):  
S Siesling ◽  
L.V van de Poll-Franse ◽  
J.J Jobsen ◽  
O.J Repelaer van Driel ◽  
A.C Voogd
Keyword(s):  
The Netherlands ◽  
Breast Conserving Surgery

Variation between hospitals in surgical margins after first breast-conserving surgery in the Netherlands

2011 ◽  
Vol 131 (2) ◽  
pp. 691-698 ◽  
Author(s):  
Margriet van der Heiden-van der Loo ◽  
Linda de Munck ◽  
Otto Visser ◽  
Pieter J. Westenend ◽  
Thijs van Dalen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
The Netherlands ◽  
Breast Conserving Surgery ◽  
Surgical Margins

scholarly journals Prevalence of responsible research practices and their potential explanatory factors: a survey among academic researchers in The Netherlands

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gowri Gopalakrishna ◽  
Jelte M. Wicherts ◽  
Gerko Vink ◽  
Ineke Stoop ◽  
Olmo Van den Akker ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
The Netherlands ◽  
Research Integrity ◽  
Academic Rank ◽  
Research Practices ◽  
Arts And Humanities ◽  
Explanatory Factors ◽  
Scientific Norm ◽  
Publication Pressure ◽  
Funding Pressure ◽  
Responsible Research

BackgroundWhile substantial attention has been paid to research misbehaviors, responsible research practices (RRPs) and their potential explanatory factors have not been studied extensively.Methods The National Survey on Research Integrity (NSRI) is an online survey targeting all disciplines and academic ranks in The Netherlands. Data was collected on 11 RRPs and 12 explanatory factor scales. Results were controlled for explanatory factor scales, academic rank, disciplinary field, gender, doing empirical research and if respondents belonged to a NSRI supporting institution or not.Results6,813 respondents completed the survey. The RRPs with the highest prevalence were avoiding plagiarism (99%), disclosing conflicts of interest (96.5%) and checking for errors before publication (94.3%). Preregistration of study protocols (42.8%), making accessible underlying data and syntaxes (47.2%), and keeping comprehensive research records (56.3%) had the lowest prevalence. Arts and humanities scholars, PhD candidates and junior researchers were associated with a lower RRP mean (-0.51 and -0.31 respectively) as was publication pressure (-0.05; 95% CI -0.08, -0.02). Mentoring (0.15; 95% CI 0.12, 0.17), scientific norm subscription (0.13; 95% CI 0.1, 0.15) and funding pressure (0.13; 95% CI0.10, 0.17) were significantly associated with a higher RRP mean.ConclusionsWe found publication pressure to affect RRPs negatively. Mentoring, scientific norm subscription and funding pressure may help foster RRPs. Arts and humanities scholars, PhD candidates and junior researchers need more efforts to raise awareness on RRPs. Further research on these groups is warranted in order to understand research integrity challenges that may be unique to them.

scholarly journals Prevalence of questionable research practices, research misconduct and their potential explanatory factors: a survey among academic researchers in The Netherlands

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gowri Gopalakrishna ◽  
Gerben ter Riet ◽  
Maarten J.L.F. Cruyff ◽  
Gerko Vink ◽  
Ineke Stoop ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
The Netherlands ◽  
Research Misconduct ◽  
Research Integrity ◽  
Research Quality ◽  
Research Practices ◽  
Publish Or Perish ◽  
Questionable Research Practices ◽  
Explanatory Factors ◽  
Scientific Norm ◽  
Response Method

BackgroundPrevalence of research misconduct, questionable research practices (QRPs) and their associations with a range of explanatory factors has not been studied sufficiently among academic researchers.Methods The National Survey on Research Integrity was aimed at all disciplinary fields and academic ranks in the Netherlands. The survey enquired about engagement in fabrication, falsification and 11 QRPs over the previous three years, and 12 explanatory factor scales. We ensured strict identity protection and used a randomized response method for questions on research misconduct. Results6,813 respondents completed the survey. Prevalence of fabrication was 4.3% (95% CI: 2.9, 5.7) and falsification 4.2% (95% CI: 2.8, 5.6). Prevalence of QRPs ranged from 0.6% (95% CI: 0.5, 0.9) to 17.5% (95 % CI: 16.4, 18.7) with 51.3% (95% CI: 50.1, 52.5) of respondents engaging frequently in ≥ 1 QRP. Being a PhD candidate or junior researcher increased the odds of frequently engaging in ≥ 1 QRP, as did being male. Scientific norm subscription (odds ratio (OR) 0.79; 95% CI: 0.63, 1.00) and perceived likelihood of detection by reviewers (OR 0.62, 95% CI: 0.44, 0.88) were associated with lower odds of research misconduct. Publication pressure was associated with higher odds of engaging frequently in ≥ 1 QRP (OR 1.22, 95% CI: 1.14, 1.30).ConclusionsWe found higher prevalence of misconduct than earlier surveys. Our results suggest that greater emphasis on scientific norm subscription, strengthening reviewers in their role as gatekeepers of research quality and curbing the “publish or perish” incentive system can promote research integrity.

scholarly journals Comply or explain’ in Belgium, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands and the UK: Insufficient explanations and an empirical analysis

2014 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. 862-873 ◽  
Author(s):  
Annika Galle
Keyword(s):  
The Netherlands ◽  
Market Failure ◽  
Central Element ◽  
Fine Tuning ◽  
Explanatory Factors ◽  
The Uk ◽  
Code Compliance ◽  
Code Provisions ◽  
Comply Or Explain

This study analyses the level and quality of the application of the comply or explain principle for listed companies in Belgium, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands and the UK. Although the comply or explain principle has nowadays become a central element in the corporate governance of the EU, a common understanding of the scope and necessary conditions for it to work effectively has not yet been achieved. This study explains the comply or explain principle from the perspective of the economic theory (legitimacy theory and theory on market failure) and is the first study of the application of the principle in which consecutive years are analysed for multiple countries simultaneously with one research method. In previous research the quality of the explanations for the code provisions not complied with and the explanatory factors have often been overlooked, while these are the key elements of the current European debate. In this study 237 annual accounts for the years 2005-2007 are analysed for five countries. The results show that company size and the period of time the comply or explain principle has been applicable in a country predict the level and quality of compliance. Although the level of code compliance is high, the quality of the explanations for code provisions not complied with is insufficient. Further fine-tuning of the comply or explain principle is necessary to achieve the most effective application in order to make the principle work in practice as intended

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document